2013299 (Refugee)

The applicant, a citizen of China, sought review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection to refuse to grant a protection visa. The applicant claimed to be a Christian who had been persecuted in China for his religious beliefs. The delegate of the Minister had found the applicant not to be a credible witness and that his claims of persecution were fabricated. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), presided over by Dr Jason Harkess, was therefore required to determine whether the applicant had established a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, specifically his religion, should he be returned to China.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was the applicant's credibility. The Tribunal had to assess whether the applicant's account of his religious activities and the alleged persecution he faced was truthful and reliable. This involved scrutinising the evidence presented by the applicant, including his testimony and any supporting documentation, against the background of general country information regarding the treatment of Christians in China. The Tribunal was tasked with determining if the applicant's claims were sufficiently credible to establish a well-founded fear of persecution as defined by the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and the Refugee Convention.

Dr Harkess found that the applicant was not a credible witness. The Tribunal identified significant inconsistencies and fabricated elements within the applicant's account, which undermined its reliability. These credibility concerns led the Tribunal to conclude that the applicant had not discharged his onus of proof in establishing a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to refuse the protection visa.